Life Support Costs for Barracks and Small Cabins

[Captain Jonah]

Yet an engineer balancing the energy and fuel flow to the jump drive could be replaced with a far faster working computer that does the same job.

Maybe the engineers union just has a lot more clout than the navigators guild

 

[BP]

In MGT, the astrogator, takes 10-60 minutes to do a gravity well slingshot trajectory? As a Difficult task to boot? One hopes that is without a computer!

Then there is the 'if the check is failed, then the astrogator must plot the Jump again. A Jump cannot be made until the astrogation calculations are complete.' thing. That implies that the skill check roll relates to an in-game 'jump astrogation check' that indicates the jump will not work. So where is the check that the check failed (the jump roll I guess, but as the earlier poster stated, Astrogation skill doesn't apply)? Normally, one would think a failed astrogation check would result in an astrogation based mis-jump. Not re-doing the check. The 10-60 minutes and an Easy difficulty suggests a cinematic effect allowing for 'going-faster' and doing the check several times (I think someone watched way too much Star Wars! ). Mostly, this seems an artifice to give the 'Navigator' something to do and justify the Astrogation skill.

IMTU:

• Astrogation is generally a computer skill. (And skills like Pilot skill, which require a minimum TL, also imply Computer-0).
  
  Jump delay is all about charging Jump Capacitors. Emerging fromm Jump generally causes 'back-feed' to Jump Capacitors (for safety of the ship - intentionally enhanced for 'stealth modes') - which is why they cannot be fully charged and ready for another Jump immediately (otherwise the back-feed might cause them to blow).
  
  Normally, 'diverting' power for a jump is a system/computer feature - not an average (i.e. slightly challenging) task for an engineer. (What they tacked on Jump drives?). Actually, I refer to this as 'powering up for jump' - the time during which the jump capacitors are fully charged up.
  
  Now an Engineer(J-Drive) can come in handy here to override safeties and fail-safes to charge them babies faster for an initial jump or in chained jumps (course one can also damage the J-Caps or P.P. :twisted. Other options include 'overcharging' some J-Caps so others have time to fully charge (allowing overcharged ones to discharge to 'full') in order to allow Jump from a P.P. with reduced rating.
  
  All, in all, I can find lots of 'believable' reasons for an Engineer, but very little for a Navigator (especially on smaller vessels)...

 

[hdan]

I prefer to think of ships being more like, well, "ships" and less like cars in the sense that the machinery is complex enough that there isn't as much automation as you might want. IMTU (which is based very strongly on CT but flavored with MgT and some personal preferences), you can't just turn a key and start your starship. There is a proper startup sequence, like with a modern aircraft or ship.

The same goes for operating the J-Drive. The computer power required to monitor and control all of the jump computations in real time is immense (hence the need for the computer rating to match the jump rating), and on most ships the computer can't do that and also monitor the engines properly. If you have extra capacity, of course you can run an Engineering expert to monitor things automatically, but in most player character cases it falls to the engineer.

Astrogation (again, IMTU) is useful for making Jump programs from one system to another for a particular time of departure. (The universe is moving, after all) You can buy Jump solutions at a Class C or better starport that are computed for your time, vector and place of departure if you don't have an Astrogator (Cr10,000 per plot - more expensive than hiring an Astrogator, but opens up a stateroom...), and your Astrogator usually does his or her job by modifying an existing solution (easy).

Computing a jump into an uncharted system is Difficult, and also modified by the ship's Sensors. Charted systems are presumed to have their data available as part of the standard Library Data for a sector, which makes computing a Jump much less difficult. Many systems only have their primary charted, which can make computations a little trickier, as there may be huge masses moving around in the system that you can't account for.

Of course I don't bother my players with all this detail unless they ask for it. I just find it convenient to have a consistent framework to provide throw-away comments like a starport official saying, "Oh, you're jumping to Jinx next? I've heard stories from captains about something in the Oort cloud skewing jumps on that route. If you want, I can upload the latest J-space nav data for Cr50...."

 

[rust]

Mostly, this seems an artifice to give the 'Navigator' something to do and justify the Astrogation skill.

It seems a bit like the job of Sigourney Weaver's character in the movie
"Galaxy Quest", which Wikipedia describes as:
"Her job consists largely of repeating what the computer says (much to
everyone else's annoyance) and talking with it, as it (inexplicably) won't
take commands from anyone else."

 

[Captain Jonah]

Then there is the 'if the check is failed, then the astrogator must plot the Jump again. A Jump cannot be made until the astrogation calculations are complete.' thing. That implies that the skill check roll relates to an in-game 'jump astrogation check' that indicates the jump will not work. So where is the check that the check failed (the jump roll I guess, but as the earlier poster stated, Astrogation skill doesn't apply)? Normally, one would think a failed astrogation check would result in an astrogation based mis-jump. Not re-doing the check. The 10-60 minutes and an Easy difficulty suggests a cinematic effect allowing for 'going-faster' and doing the check several times (I think someone watched way too much Star Wars! ). Mostly, this seems an artifice to give the 'Navigator' something to do and justify the Astrogation skill.

Yep, since you just reroll the astorgation check and have hours to do so the whole idea of an astrogator is pointless unless its some very rare type maths wiz in the ISS.

No one needs em, no one uses em. All in all a fairly useless skill and occupation for characters. They have no effect on ship travel at all. Poor sad astrogators, nursing cheap drinks at the starport bar, swapping tales of the old days when people needed them.

Which is my point, without house rules the whole skill is a waste of ink/photons and can be dropped from the skill tables without any problems. Woe betide the poor character who ends up with several ranks in Astrogation.

 

[BP]

I prefer to think of ships being more like, well, "ships" and less like cars in the sense that the machinery is complex enough that there isn't as much automation as you might want. IMTU (which is based very strongly on CT but flavored with MgT and some personal preferences), you can't just turn a key and start your starship. There is a proper startup sequence, like with a modern aircraft or ship.

That certainly captures the feel of CT.

In a truly modern aircraft or ship these functions are pretty much automated (not to say old-school best practices don't still apply ).

However, at the time of CT's creation, computers and automated navigational systems were by no means mainstream. Even fly-by-wire aircraft were a rarity (The F-8 was the first U.S. military one IIRC about 1970~2). Ironically, my dad worked on the controllers used by the pilots in the all digital fly-by-wire control systems for the Space Shuttle Enterprise (the engine-less, space shuttle test-bed) that first flew in the same year Traveller came out - 1977!

Inertial navigation systems were still evolving, but reliable ones that could be depended on for automation where mostly classified, and GPS was available only to military (IIRC) starting about the same timeframe as the F-8. Though both FBW and GPS had rudimentary implementations dating back into the 50's and 60's - most of that was probably still classified.

My first exposure to CT in the early 80's meant I was already familiar with not only computers (made many programs for CT), but fly-by-wire systems like the F-16 (which, come to think about it, also had its first production flights around 1977!) and the advanced guidance and pattern recognition systems that were part of the U.S. cruise missile programs. These things and the 'rumors' of several existing military capabilities (automated mission completion and return; over-the-hill automated target selection and prosecution systems) along with the Sci-Fi of the time, had progressed a long way...

P.S. - gotta love Galaxy Quest!

 

[BP]

... the whole idea of an astrogator is pointless ...

Well, they can come in useful if equipped with a datapad and the ship systems are down and one wants to eject cryoberths in the direction of another solar body

 

[rust]

Traveller has a couple of skills that give me a headache, from the missing
Athletic (Swim) skill through the strange organization of the science skills
(changed for my settings) to my personal bugbear, the Jack of All Trades
skill (finally deleted from the skill list for my settings). :roll:

 

[hdan]

That certainly captures the feel of CT.

In a truly modern aircraft or ship these functions are pretty much automated (not to say old-school best practices don't still apply ).

Some high-performance vehicles (like Apache helicopters and jet fighters) still take some time to "warm up", though if you know what you're doing you can get them in the air more quickly.

Inertial navigation systems were still evolving, but reliable ones that could be depended on for automation where mostly classified, and GPS was available only to military (IIRC) starting about the same timeframe as the F-8. Though both FBW and GPS had rudimentary implementations dating back into the 50's and 60's - most of that was probably still classified.

Sounds about right to me. Civilian GPS is way younger than CT, as are cell phones. Sounds like you got into CT around the same time I did - early 80's. It does amuse me that the "sci fi" tech we grew up with is mostly far behind the real-world tech of today.

For MTU, I consider TL-12 to be the "CT Extrapolation Tech" point, where you have some crazy physics-bending stuff like J-Drives and Gravitics and all, but the overall feel is still relatively un-automated. Above that, start adding "whiz-bang" (LOL) stuff like holographic displays, talking computers, personal robots, cybernetic augmentation (TL-14+), etc. This is more for the feel than out of any sort of logic. The fancy TL-13+ stuff is only what "the other guys" have, and something to aspire to. Considering the average TL of the Marches, most worlds don't really have much better than "70's Tech" to begin with.

But I'm getting way off thread - back to Astrogation.

I can see the argument for either getting rid of it as a PC skill or folding it completely into Navigation, the idea being that if you're trained in operating a Starship, you know how to work the software to get you between stars and to/from the planet surface.

"Navigation" in these terms would be a combination of knowing how to run standard software packages and some basic position and orientation finding skills, though without special knowledge of a system and some really good scanning equipment, I would think doing navigation "by hand" would be all but impossible.

I guess it's part of MgT's more finely delineated skill list. Back in the days of CT, Navigation covered MgT's Navigation, Astrogation and Sensors skills.

 

[BP]

...I would think doing navigation "by hand" would be all but impossible. ....

I guess it's part of MgT's more finely delineated skill list. Back in the days of CT, Navigation covered MgT's Navigation, Astrogation and Sensors skills.

Yep - I like the MGT delineations, but would have absorbed Astrogation into Pilot skill.

Navigation makes sense, but is of limited use in most higher tech situations and could be considered part of other skills (survival, seafarer, flyer, drive, sensors).

Speaking of which, the non-rotor Flyer specialties kinda overlap Pilot of any specialty, due to the requirement for pilots to be able to handle Grav ('... use gravitic technology')and Wing ('... using a lifting body').

 

[rinku]

Well, if you really want to get down to it, pretty much all the space skills except Engineering may as well be done by the computer with the crewmember selecting choices from a drop down menu. Even Pilot skill comes to look an awful lot more like Flyer skill once you hit the atmosphere and deep gravity. Navigators, Gunners and Pilots in space are really just guys monitoring and instructing the computers. MGT even provides rules for computer programs to take over these tasks.

But... that's not very Traveller, really. You should have hot shot pilots, dead eye gunners and brilliant Astrogators. And suffer the consequences if you lack the requisite skills. It may not stand up to close scrutiny, and by all means be more realistic if you want a harder science setting, but that's the way it SHOULD be, IMHO.

As well, routine jumps should be just that - routine. If you've done everything right and taken some extra time, both the Astrogation and Engineering rolls should have healthy effect values and your jump should be fine. If you're under fire and have to make a hasty jump, you may find that a highly skilled Astrogator is not the luxury that you otherwise thought...

 

[Egil Skallagrimsson]

In terms of MoT, think we are being a little defeatist about astrogation, if you, or the computer, don't roll successfully, you don't jump, which makes it a pretty useful skill.

Why does a failure lead to no jump, rather than an inaccurare jump? I rationalise it by assuming that calulating jump co-ordinates is very mathematical, and, as part of the process, requires a checking equation. If that doesn't add up, then you start again as your instructions to the engineer will be useless. Navigators still learn the skill as a fall back should the expert program fail.

In terms of jump accuracy, if you take your time with the divert power, +2, good engineer J drive, +2, fair edu, +1, then you should be able to take a good effect through to the jump roll. The problems start when your badly trained, ill educated 3rd engineer (engine room cleaner) is in a rush...

For inaccurate jumps, the MTU impact is out system by 1 light second per effect failed by multiplied by the number of parsecs crossed. In a m 1 trader, this can be a real drama.

Egil

 

[Captain Jonah]

In terms of MoT, think we are being a little defeatist about astrogation, if you, or the computer, don't roll successfully, you don't jump, which makes it a pretty useful skill.

Why does a failure lead to no jump, rather than an inaccurare jump? I rationalise it by assuming that calulating jump co-ordinates is very mathematical, and, as part of the process, requires a checking equation. If that doesn't add up, then you start again as your instructions to the engineer will be useless. Navigators still learn the skill as a fall back should the expert program fail. Egil

A failure of your astrogation roll only causes a problem if you are in need of a quick jump since of the jump calculations don't add up you simply rerun them. A M1 merchant takes six hours to get to 100D of a earth sized planet, that is enough time to run your astrogation plot 9 or 10 times. Even a Nav 0 computer will should get one of those rolls right.

This is why I think the jump plot should be part of the jump roll, its like any navigation, doesn't matter how fast the boat is if you are heading to the wrong place. At present unless you are in combat or needing a fast exit the astrogation roll is pointless, it just takes time to get right.

Hence adding the astrogation skill into the jump roll as I mentioned earlier. Previous versions (cannon minefield) mention astrogators plotting good jumps that bring the ship out right on the 100D limit, with MonT its kind of random. Another reason why I do the little charts so that a near failure has less of an impact than everyone being killed when you run out of fuel.

Take for example the Far Trader with 2 weeks of fuel. It fills up the day before take off, spends half a day going out to 100D and faffing with customs, traffic etc then does a jump 2. Being a single point off the roll for accurate puts you 1D 100,000,000 Km off target. At M1 it takes 5 and a half days to cover that distance so in this example the ship would be out of fuel just as it gets back to where it was aiming for. If this was a GG for refueling they get to sit around with no power and hope someone else comes to help them. Not a massive problem in a well travelled system with M6 tugs and rescue craft, a bit nasty in a connecting system on a main.

I don't mind it being wrapped into the pilot (spaceship) skill, just as long as it does something.

 

[Egil Skallagrimsson]

A failure of your astrogation roll only causes a problem if you are in need of a quick jump since of the jump calculations don't add up you simply rerun them.

Yup, that's the long and the short of it, given time a competent astrogater will get the correct co-ordinates. However, in a hurry the geek (should that be Gator?) with Astrogation 3 might save your bacon.

Not really happy with combining astrogation with normal Navigation (finding your way to the pub) or Pilot skills (the act of "flying" a space ship). In fact, I would be very dubious about allowing Jack of All trades to have an influence, and would probably only allow an unskilled, -3, roll to someone who had a Science (Physics) 1 or better, or similar, otherwise, no skill, and your stuck.

Thats all with jump drive, if we used hyperdrive, warp drive or something different, would definately have different take on this.

Think this is a MTU vs YTU thing.

Egil